O620 



1 





\^V^ 









s 



.V 



.,,.<«. ^ ./- .V ^^ 












.s' 



^q'w- ^o".,^ '^o^ 



\> *■ ' Vl^ J, - > 



-'-cli/-^,* „0 



--mc. ^-./ '^^■- '-^o«' r^^. %/ mk- '*-o 



*^. 



o. »' ,&^ \b *' .-. s' 






=^ " "' ^ aO ^^ <- = „ ' ^^ ^q^ - . , 1 • ,0-' 



^ ^S^/,^''^ '^y^i:^^/'^ ^MfS^^^".^""^ ^^^^w" 

o " o , ''r-, ,'•> « ' ' ' 



V 


















>-^ 



wrrt" 






,. jy-M^j% 






.^" „». ";•, ••= J' 



. " o 



»--^"V^- 



•^vl'' 






• 







c » 3 V 



^/ ' ■ ^ %.^ ^^iSfe^ ^^:.^^ ::^^^"l" %/ 






,^^-. 



"°. 



.0^ 



-p 



,.Q' 






.^ q. 



"<=.- 



'^^i^^<^ 






0" 



.0' 



<^. 



■0^ 



" I " o 



-."y 






^ 



'•^. 



■> » ■= » *o 






V 



<c' 






v<; 






\> <^ *i^ , » ,- ""Z' AV '^- 



<? 



-lii 



.-i'" 



'-fs 



.0" 



.■^ 






.0^ 









^' "-^^ 






^0^ 






V 



o 






■' .^& 






\^ 






..rV 

I- 



■^ 






■^;'~N':';il'"is''„ 



U-&- .-:".'.;- -t. 



,0 









^-^^ 









^0•' '^^. •' = 



."t ■/■■ 



---^'-'./.^ 






.-^ 



r -'-^^ 









-V-, 






C^^^ 



.ss^ 



\ 



-n^.- 0^ 






% 



h 



^■^ 



3 > J" 






s- 



*\ 



.>• 



> 



.v^.. 



<^cV 



7>j < 


^^- 


C^' 




>^' 




<<■ 






V 


•> ' 


o ^. ^ 


.^ •-' 




" 












o ,0 ■ ' ^ 












V/=-\>v'^ 



v^P; 












,■=1 J-- 



^ 



0^- 



^- ■^. 'v..<,^^ . ^- -^- -■ 



,0' c = " 



■>- ^-^i^;'-*:^ 



..V 






f w7Z^;'-. ■ 



,0' 



THE 

GERMAN-AMERICANS 

and the 

European War 



A REPLY TO 
Mr. Oswald Garrison Villard and Others 



BY 

GEORGE VON SKAL 



F.atur'- to 
V^.7. c.'*Iiibliorfraphy 

I :o. of CoDgrass 
'::;it yet, C.ualogrued) 



1^^ 






'-->v^ 



The German- Americans and the European War. 



A Reply to Mr. Oswald Garrison Villard and Others. 



By GEORGE VON SKAL. 



With the exception of the first few years after the creation 
jf this republic the naturalized citizen has been the object of 
;onstant attacks unless he was of English nativity. In the war 
yi the revolution the Germans and the Irishmen fought almost 
without exception for the independence of the colonies, while 
practically all the Tories or opponents of the new common- 
vealth were of English birth. After the republic had been 
;stablished about ten years the Federal party, which was in 
)ossession of the government, held the foreigners responsible for 
he attacks made upon it. It passed in 1798 the so-called alien 
md sedition laws, which practically deprived every inhabitant of 
he United States born on foreign soil of the protection of the 
aws. These statutes, which, by the way, were soon repealed, 
vere the only ones ever passed in the United States with the 
•pen and ovowed intention to prevent criticism of the Govern- 
nent by suspending the Constitution and supplanting judges 
iud juries by executive orders, and it is worthy of more than pass- 
ng notice that they, as stated explicitly by Prof. Woodrow Wilson 
ri his "History of the American People,'' were directed against 
•■renchmen and Englishmen. The loyalty of Germans and Irishmen 
n the United States had never been questioned up to that time. 
During the following decades immigration from Europe was so 
mall that the percentage of naturalized voters was negligible, 
nd therefore not much attention was paid to them. A change 
ame, when about the middle of the last century, large numbers 
if Germans and Irishmen had come to this country and began 
take an interest in American politics. They and their virtues 
eceived much and constant praise from all parties who wanted 

3 



their votes before elections as well as someunies after them, by 
those for whom they had voted, but by the politicians who could 
not persuade them to follow them and by those with whom 
they disagreed, the naturalized citizens have always been at- 
tacked and frequently abused. They have been called foreign- 
ers and aliens, unable to understand American institutions and 
unworthy to live under them. Flattery has been bestowed upon 
them frequently when the desire to win their votes existed, but 
full justice has never been accorded to them by the American 
people as a whole, and not even by American historians. The 
"History of the American People," by Woodrow Wilson, con- 
tains hardly a mention of the influence of the Germans upon 
the development of the United States. The "hazing" of the 
naturalized citizen, as the President pleased to express himself, 
is therefore not a new departure caused by their present attitude, 
but has been in existence from the very day when they first 
began to form an influential part of the American people. 

The slightest attempt to criticize conditions in this country 
or to compare them with those in European countries has im- 
mediately been followed by the insulting advice that those who 
do not like it here had better go back to where they came from. 
Such suggestions were of course accepted with sincere pity for 
those who in their deeprooted self-sufficiency refused to benefit 
from the wider experience of others, but the naturalized citizen 
has always regretted that it seemed impossible to convince 
those with whom he happened to differ of his honesty and con- 
scientiousness in the discharge of his civic duties. 

No American citizen of German birth has been secure against 
these attacks. In the speech to which I shall refer at length, 
Mr. Oswald Garrison Villard exalts the late Carl Schurz as a 
perfect American citizen and a model for all Germans residing 
in the United States. We concur in this most heartily. But Mr. 
Villard conveys the impression that Mr. Schurz was immune 
from the aspersions constantly cast upon German-Ameri- 
cans. This was by no means the case. His high patriotism, his 
universally acknowledged probity and the great services he had 
rendered to his adopted country did not protect him. Every 
politician, high and low, who differed with him used his alien 
birth as a means to belittle him and to throw suspicion upon his 
motives. Senator Conkling called him "more Prussian than the 



King of Prussia," and insinuated that Mr. Schurz was the paid 
agent of Prussia in this country. Senator Carpenter of Wis- 
consin accused him of being unable to fully understand Ameri- 
can ideals and of remaining a German under the surface. Senator 
Morton of Indiana held him "guilty of the attempt to array the 
Germans against men of native birth, making an effort to segre- 
gate the German vote, and claiming to own the American citizens 
of German nativity." Later, when Carl Schurz was Secretary 
of the Interior and took the first steps to protect the forests 
against vandalism, Senator Blaine charged him with an attempt 
to foist the abhorrent system of Prussian bureaucracy upon this 
country. These few instances will suffice as proof that the con- 
ditions now prevailing are not exceptional, and that every 
German-American, no matter how unselfishly and loyally he 
had served the United States, has been subjected to the process 
of "gentle hazing" approved and recommended by our President. 
We all know how this feeling was intensified at the out- 
break of the war, and how everybody who refused to align him- 
self on the side of the allies was assailed with a fury that at times 
appeared almost irrational. It has not abated, on the contrary 
it seems to be stronger and fiercer than ever. The time has 
arrived when a comprehensi\'e reply to the charges uttered 
should be made. If I call my attempt to formulate such a reply 
an answer to Mr. Oswald Garrison Villard and others, I do this 
because Mr, Villard has in the form of a lecture before the 
Laurel Hill Association of Stockbridge collected all the accusa- 
tions made against the naturalized citizens, especially the German- 
Americans, and presented a formidable appearing indictment. 
Taking this document as the basis for my reply, I am given the 
opportunity to take the charges up point by point. In addition, 
Mr. Villard lays stress upon the fact that he was born upon 
German soil of a German father, and he uses these facts in con- 
nection with the well-known friendship existing between his 
father and the late Carl Schurz to create the impression that 
he is especially fitted to speak on the attitude of the American 
citizen of German nativity or descent. I deny this claim most 
emphatically, for while it is true that Mr. Villard's father was 
a German, and he himself was partly educated in Germany and 
speaks the German language, it is an undeniable fact that his 
viewpoint is distinctly English, that his knowledge of German 



history is deficient, and his insiglit into German conditions and 
the German spirit is badly warped by prejudice and passion. 
As to myself, I came to the United States nearly forty years ago, 
am a citizen since 1884 and have ever tried to be loyal and of 
service to this republic. I have frequently been at odds with 
other German-Americans because I opposed actions which in my 
opinion might produce antagonism between the German element 
and the rest of the people. Perhaps the fact that many years 
of my life were devoted to an honest efifort to bring about a 
better understanding between the American and the German 
people, gives me a certain right to make this reply. However, 
I speak for myself, have no mandate from any organization or 
any large number of my countrymen, and say what follows 
solely because I believe that somebody should publicly resent 
the insults showered upon us. If we cannot convince our 
enemies that they wrong us and are serving their country — 
whose welfare they have constantly on the tips of their tongues- 
— badly by sowing hatred and dissension, we can at least show 
that we are not afraid. 

Carl Schurz and Oswald G. Villard. 

Like all the others engaged in this campaign, Mr. Villard 
attempts to strengthen his claim by quoting sentences from the 
writings and speeches of Carl Schurz. He uses them more ex- 
tensively than anybody else has done so far. This is perhaps 
natural because, as I have said before, his family and that of 
the late German-American statesman were connected by strong 
ties of friendship. It is extremely convenient to call a silent 
witness because we must take his words as they are printed, 
and we cannot ask him to explain in what connection they were 
uttered or what he had in mind when he pronounced them. We 
can never know exactly what feelings a sentence was intended 
to convey if we consider it standing alone; we must endeavor to 
fathom the state of mind that produced it. But Mr. Villard not 
only quotes single sentences which suit his purposes and builds 
his arguments upon them, but he sometimes makes out his 
case first, renders judgment and then calls Carl Schurz as a 
witness. He quotes correctly from a speech of Carl Schurz 
that the American citizens of German blood have never per- 

6 



Tiitted their affection for their native land to interfere with their 
iuties as American citizens and least of all to seduce them into 
my design or desire to use their power in American politics for 
oreign ends, and he continues: "How amazed would Carl 
khurz be to return to us today to find that that has come to 
)ass which he deemed inconceivable, that German-American 
iffection for their native land has interfered with the proper 
ittitude of the great bulk of those towards the land of their 
idoption and has seduced them into the design and the desire 
o use their power in American politics for foreign ends." Now 
^ submit that this reasoning is wholly mendacious and almost 
iiabolical. There is no evidence of any kind that the German- 
\mericans have used or attempted to use their power in domes- 
ic politics for foreign ends nor is this the cause of the attacks 
nade against them. The war was not twenty-four hours old 
vhen almost the entire American press began to abuse not only 
he German government and the German people, but every 
jerman in the United States, whether an American citizen or 
lot, if he did not immediately acknowledge that Germany was 
n the wrong, had begun the war and should be defeated and 
)unished. This has been kept up incessantly with undiminished 
;nergy. Surely the German-Americans could not have made any 
ittempt to interfere in the interest of Germany during the first 
veek of the war when they were called traitors and undesirables 
;imply because they conscientiously believed that Germany had 
)een wantonly attacked and deserved to win the war. And 
luring all this time I have never heard that any German-Ameri- 
:an has demanded that the United States should interfere in the 
;onflict or do anything to assist Germany. I have been informed 
hat many illustrious Americans have called upon the President 
md the nation to join the Allies in their war against Germany, 
nen like ex-President Roosevelt, President Eliot, Mr. Joseph 
d. Choate, Mr. Rene Coudert, Mr. George Haven Putnam, Mr. 
A'illiam D. Guthrie. They have made more or less violent 
speeches to that effect, and they have abandoned the good old 
;ustom, observed by all German organizations in this countrj 
:ven during this present war, of toasting the President first at 
ormal occasions, for the habit to toasting him jointly with the 
SCing of England and the President of the French republic. They 
lave reiterated time and time again that we owe a debt of grati- 

7 



tude to France and must repay it now in order to enable her 
to crush Germany. I could extend this list until we are all 
tired of listening to .it, but it is unnecessary to do so because 
we know the facts, and I am sure Mr. Villard knows them too. 
Even at the risk of becoming tedious, -we must repeat con- 
tinually and most emphatically that no voice has been raised from 
among the German-Americans asking interference in the war or 
a single step with the intention of favoring Germany or Austria- 
Hungary. All demands of this kind have originated with the 
enemies of the Central Powers and with American citizens who 
either were born in, or are connected with, England or France, 
or who are proud of a long line of American ancestry. Every 
demand emanating from the German-Americans was prompted 
as much by their desire to serve their adopted country as by 
their love for tlie fatherland. We har^'e always believed, we 
believe now, and we will continue to believe that the United 
States and Germany have many interests in common, and that 
nothing should be done in either country which might harm the 
other or lead to misuderstandings. We know that the United 
States has nothing to fear from Germany and that all the stories 
of sinister designs on the part of the German Empire upon 
America are silly and contemptible falsehoods, and we are 
thoroughly sorry if they are believed here. We believe, how- 
ever, and in fact we do know that Great Britain has never been 
the friend of this Union, and if we oppose all movements and 
actions which may lead to an increase of British influence on 
American soil, we are led by a sincere love for the country to 
which we have sworn allegiance. It is natural that we want 
to see the land where we were born and where we have left 
friends and relatives, victorious in the great struggle now going 
on, but we have asked nothing and done nothing to assist her 
to accomplish her purposes. Our efforts have been confined to 
charitable work, and native born Americans have done the same 
for other nations and have even asissted us in the work we have 
undertaken. It is true that we have sent large amounts of 
money and gifts of every description to the fatherland, but they 
were destined for the wounded and the cripples, the widows and 
the orphans and the sufferers from the war in general. We liax'e 
not even gone as far as Americans who organized a movement 
to supply the soldiers of the allied armies in the trenches with 

8 



necessities, because we believed this action to be unneutral. We 
have strictly confined ourselves to actions the motives and 
purposes of which cannot be questioned. 



The Right to Criticise the President. 

It is quite true that we ha\e organized a movement the 
object of which is to induce our government to observe strict 
neutrality towards all belligerents. In this connection we have 
to some extent entered the field of politics and employed the 
means at the command of every citizen to exert pressure upon 
officials, whether appointed or elected, -to compel the administra- 
tion to treat all nations alike. In doing this we exercised a right 
of the American citizen that has never been questioned, although 
of course those who are of different opinion do not like it. We 
believe, and in fact we know, that the President of this Republic 
has not been strictly fair in the treatment of the different gov- 
ernments who are engaged in the war. This is actually ac- 
knowledged by the newspapers who cannot do enough to find 
fault with us. The "Evening Post," for instance, acknowledged 
that Germany has been treated more harshly than Great Britain, 
but excused the President because the offenses committed by 
the two nations were of different character and had to be treated 
differently. Whatever may have happened, we cannot under- 
stand the reason why Great Britain is permitted to cripple our 
trade with foreign nations, and why that celebrated note which 
should protest against it was held back until it became so 
elusive that its very existence was questioned, until it suddenly 
appeared after more than six months of watchful waiting. The 
President himself, through his official mouthpieces, has declared 
that he wanted the differences with Germany out of the way 
first before acting aginst Great Britain. Now, I respectfully 
submit that if I have cause for serious complaint against my 
two neighbors, and am suffering from their actions, I will in 
all probability proceed against both of them and not tell the 
one that he may continue to violate my rights and cause me 
grievous harm until I have settled with the other. This is ex- 
actly the position the President has taken, and we do not believe 
that it is the correct one, and are determined to continue to 

9 



oppose him. It is perfectly true that we have criticised the 
President and his advisers, and in this connection I may quote 
Carl Schurz, who said: "My country, right or wrong; if right, 
to be kept right; if wrong, to be set right." That is what we 
intend to do and what we are working for. We believe honestly 
and conscientiously that the President and his administration 
have been wrong in many of the steps they have taken, and we 
will use our power and influence to set them right. The privi- 
lege of the American citizen to differ with the administration 
and with any official who has been elected to high position has 
never been seriously questioned except in times like these by 
people who believed themselves superior to the mass of the 
people and insisted that their opinion must be taken as gospel 
and followed by everybody else. We have never gone as far in 
our criticism of the President as good native American citizens 
who could boast of many generations of ancestors in this coun- 
try. A few weeks after my arrival in New York a new President 
was inaugurated, and I remember that a newspaper in this city 
printed the portrait of the President on the fourth of March 
with the word "l^raud" printed in large black letters on his 
forehead. The same newspaper, almost during the whole term 
of this President, ne\er mentioned him in any other way than 
by the designation "His Fraudulency," and in later years re- 
ferred to another President continually as "the Stuffed Prophet." 
After President Cleveland had sent his message on Venezuela 
to Congress, the "Evening Post," which is so jealous of the 
present Chief Executive's inviolability, said: "We are grieved 
and shocked that anybody holding the high office as President 
of the United States could play with the mighty issue of peace 
and war as a political game. We can see nothing else in it." . . . 
"Mr. Cleveland as a pilot has gone overboard." . . . "Mr. Cleve- 
land's hysterical message is a fitting sequel to the third term 
pranks he has been playing." . . . "The President's mad appeal." 
. . . "The judgment of the God-fearing people leaves him 
morally impeached of high crimes and misdemeanors." "The 
World" was still more outspoken, as will be seen from the fol- 
lowing extracts taken from its columns : "Under the first im- 
pulse of the shock which the President's astounding message 
on the Venezuela affair gave "The World" pronounced it a 
blunder. After a week's study we must characterize it as a 

10 



crime." . . . "It grows more and more astounding that Presi- 
dent Cleveland could have misrepresented the situation in so 
grave an emergency, in so unnecessary a manner and in so 
shockingly unconscientious a spirit." ... It stated that the re- 
action against imitation jingoism had set in, and true patriotism 
was prevailing over buncombe and blunder. It printed letters 
on its editorial page which spoke of "the criminally insane 
action, the stupendous folly of the President," and called the 
latter "the arch jingo and the greatest financial wrecker of the 
country, guilty of criminal imi)rudence." These ebullitions were 
accompanied by caricatures ridiculing the President. Of course. 
President Cleveland had committed the efifrontery of doing some- 
thing that displeased Great Britain, and that made all the dif- 
ference in the world. ' 

Vv^e Are Under No Obligations to England or France. 

We have not gone nearly as far as the American press has 
in many cases, especially during elections. We have not, as 
Mr. Villard claims, stood by the Fatherland through thick and 
thin, right and wrong, and we return this accusation and say, 
knowing that we speak the truth, that those Americans who 
have attacked us have stood and are now standing by the Allies 
through thick and thin, right or wrong, and entirely regardless 
of the consequences of their action for the United States of 
America. Our sympathies are with our Fatherland, and we 
hope that it will accomplish a splendid victory, in fact we are 
certain of it, and we rejoice in it because this will mean a bless- 
ing not only to Germany, but to all mankind and in a great 
measure also to the United States. We know that Germany 
has never harmed this country and never intended or attempted 
to do so. We know also that the only countries who ever 
violated, or attempted to violate, the Monroe Doctrine were 
Great Britain and France, who are now pictured to us as the 
only friends we have. Have we entirely forgotten the war of 
1812? "And does nobody remember the fact that long after the 
Monroe Doctrine had been created and seemingly accepted by 
all European governments. Great Britain took a part of Ameri- 
can soil and formed the crown colony of British Honduras? It 
is true that the American administration of that day did not 

11 



interfere for reasons of its own, I presume, but the fact remains 
that Great Britain violated the Monroe Doctrine when it suited 
her purposes. And must we call attention to the fact that in 
the hour of direst need, during the Civil War, Germany was on 
the side of the Union with her sympathies and assistance as 
far as it could be given, while Great Britain and France did 
their best to help the Confederacy, wanted to recognize it and 
waited in thinly concealed pleasure for the day when the Union 
would be disrupted forever? Did not France, when we were 
weak and engaged in a struggle for existence, in bold contempt 
for the Monroe Doctrine, attempt to found an empire in Mexico 
and give up this plan only after we had finished the fight, and 
our armies were marching towards the Rio Grande? 

Are we or have we ever been under any obligataion to 
Great Britain that compels us to arraign ourselves on her side 
now and assist her against a nation that has always been our 
friend? Has not the debt of gratitude that we owe to France 
been paid off long ago? Even if we leave out of all consider- 
ation the fact that her main reason for assisting us in the war 
of independence was her hatred of England and her desire to 
hamper Great Britain, has she done so much for us that we 
must now help to repair the crutches on which she is staggering 
to perdition? And where is the reason for us to come to the 
assistance of Italy, which went into this war without any cause 
or excuse, simply because she believed her neighbor was weak 
and could be compelled to give her a few square miles of terri- 
tory more than she was ready to turn over to her without a 
struggle? No, we cannot see a reason why this country should, 
even in the thoughts of her people, favor one side more than 
the other, and we certainly will use all means at our command 
to induce or compel the administration to be really neutral. It 
is certainly not necessary for me to explain in what way neu- 
trality has been violated by those in charge of the destiny of this 
country. I could only tell you things that you all know, and that 
are known to all those who attack us. Furthermore, they ac- 
knowledge that they are not neutral, that nobody can be neutral, 
and that the President himself may be outwardly neutral be- 
cause his high position forces this duty upon him, but that in 
his heart he regrets that he cannot be of service to the side in 
the justice of whose cause be believes. We do not reproach him 

18 



or anybody for sympathizing with the Allies, but we do insist, 
and we will continue to insist, that this state of mind must not 
find expression in official acts by the government of this country, 
and furthermore, that we be also permitted to have our sym- 
pathies and to express them in every way we wish as Icng as 
no harm is done to our country. 

It will of course be said that as advocates of an embargo of 
arms and ammuriition we are trying to interfere in the war in 
favor of Germany. We may as well acknowledge that this is 
one of the motives, but much stronger is the feeling that the 
United States should not discriminate against one side in the 
war, and that as long as the belligerents cannot all benefit by, 
or use the sources of supplies existing in this country, none of 
them should be allowed to do so. This, in our opinion, would be 
a higher neutrality than the one ordinarily observed by neutral 
nations, and although our sincerity is called in question, we in- 
sist emphatically that we are not alone prompted by a desire to 
help Germany, but also by the wish to further the welfare of 
the United States. The enormous increase in the number and 
size of plants and factories manufacturing war material, the 
devotiuu of establishments formerly engaged in peaceful in- 
dustrial pursuits to the making of arms and ammunition, the 
shifting of capital from lines of industry which have grown up 
and prospered in time of peace to others that can pay profits 
only as long as this war lasts or others are in progress, is, in our 
opinion, a twofold danger, economic as well as political. The 
consequences will be seen when the demand for implements of 
warfare suddenl}'- ceases ; there will not only be enormous losses, 
but those now reaping large profits will naturally strive to con- 
tinue a condition that is so advantageous to them. It is hardly 
necessary to say more than this because every farseeing man or 
woman will understand us. It is at least a cause for surprise 
that the same newspapers v.'ho have alwa}'s attacked the manu- 
facturers of arms and ammunition and have frequently accused 
them of being in reality promoters of wars and therefore dan- 
gerous, are now among the most ardent partisans of those who 
want to continue the business that has grown to such enormous 
proportions. 

But as a question of fact we can throw back the accusation 
that we are prompted by motives which will not stand close 

13 



scrutiny. It is not true at all that tlie exportation of arms 
and ammunition cannot be stopped because neutrality prevents 
it. Such embargoes have been declared before by other nations 
and by the United States, and at this moment practically all the 
neutral nations of Europe have declared them in force. The 
real reason for the opposition to our demands is that we would 
make it more difficult for the allies to crush Germany if we did 
not furnish them with the means of continuing the war. You 
will all remember what an outcry was raised by the newspapers 
of this country when it became known that the German govern- 
ment had contracted for ammunition in this country in order 
to diminish the supply of its enemies. The comments of the 
newspapers at that time showed clearly that they considered 
it wrong for Germany to buy war material, while they favored 
assistance to the allies in every way imaginable. The truth is 
that if conditions were reversed, and Germany could draw her 
supplies from this country while the allies were prevented from 
doing it, an embargo would be declared within twenty-four 
hours. We protest against the spirit manifested by the attitude 
of the press and part of the public more than against the action 
itself. Germany can continue the war and defeat her enemies, 
even if they draw the last pound of iron or explosives from this 
country, but by furnishing these materials we become a party 
to the continuation of a bloody war and assume a certain re- 
sponsibility for the victims and the losses and sufifering caused 
by it. 

Why Germans Have Ceased to Emigrate. 

In his lecture Mr. Villard said: "What could amaze Carl 
Schurz more than to find a number of Germans who, like him- 
self, came to this country to escape the very militarism and 
autocracy they now uphold. . . . etc." This sentence shows 
clearly that he is utterly ignorant of conditions prevailing 
in Germany. To talk of a military autocracy is absurd, but I 
shall refer to this later on ; for the present I wish to point out 
that he is in error if he supposes that the Germans now in this 
country left Germany to escape an autocracy or military service. 
This was indeed the case fifty or sixty years ago, but times 
have changed since then. Practically all the Germans in this 

14 



country who were physically fit have served their time in the 
army, are proud of it and would not want to lose the memory 
of the years they passed as soldiers of the Empire. They are 
grateful for the training and the education they received, and 
they know that through their military service they have been 
better fitted to make their way through the world and to accom- 
plish success in peaceable pursuits. Whenever we who knov^r 
meet a man who has left Germany and speaks disparagingly 
of the army and of military service, we try to avoid him, for 
we know that he does not deserve confidence, and probably left 
his home in a hurry to save himself from a fate that was riclily 
deserved. The very fact that there is practically no emigration 
from Germany siiows that the people are not discontented, and 
that the talk about dissatisfaction with existing conditions is 
utterly absurd. The average annual emigration from Germany 
during tlie last twenty years has not exceeded twenty thousand 
persons per annum, or about three out of every ten thousand, 
and it is much smaller than the emigration from the United 
States both in number and in proportion to the total population. 
From 1901 to 1913 emigration from the United States averaged 
annually 575,737 persons, or roughly figuring 70 out of every 
ten thousand. It was more than twenty times as large as the 
emigration from Germany, not taking into account the large 
number of well-to-do people who practically expatriate them- 
selves by living abroad almost constantly. This condition is, 
by the way, peculiar to the United States, and deserves the close 
attention of those who maintain that in no other country can 
the same state of happiness be approached. The time when 
emigration was caused largely by religious and political perse- 
cution is gone long ago, and today it is regulated by economic 
conditions largely. Only one country exists in Europe where a 
considerable part of the population is so cruelly treated that it 
emigrates in large numbers whenever the opportunity oflfers, 
and that is Russia, the dear friend and ally of Great Britain and 
France, with whom she fights for liberty and tlie independence 
of small nations. While we German-Americans revere the 
memory of Carl Schurz, this does not mean that we do not 
differ with him on some points. I was fortunate enough to 
enjoy his confidence to some extent during the last years of 
his life, and I remember distinctly that in the last presidential 

15 



election in which he took an interest he had occasion to write 
a speech to be delivered before a meeting of German-Americans. 
In this he expressed the opinion that the German-Americans 
should be especially enthusiastic in the fight against imperialism 
because they had left their fatherland to escape military service 
and the necessity of fighting in a war. I pointed out to him 
that he was mistaken, that times had changed, and his audience 
might not take kindly to that expression. He was not ofifended 
by my remarks, because he was always tolerant of the opinion 
of others, but lie insisted that his point of view was correct. 
When the speech was delivered, the audience kept quiet, did 
not applaud, and from the faces of the listeners it could be 
clearly seen that they were rather astonished at hearing such a 
statement with which they could not agree. Later on Carl 
Schurz graciously acknowledged that he had been mistaken, 
and remarked that of course he was getting old and probably 
once in a while not in full accord with the changing times. I 
remonstrated against this, but it is undoubtedly true that he, 
like every man of ripe age, lived at least to some extent, in the 
past, and that the impressions which the years of h's early 
struggles had made still had a strong hold on him. But such 
was the beauty of his character that he discussed the question 
with me quite frankly, and though he deplored the change that 
had come over the German people, he did not find fault with 
them, but acknowledged readily that there must be some reason 
for this new condition. He always respected the views of others 
and never looked down upon them because they held opinions 
contrary to his own ; but rather tried to find out the reasons 
and causes for the difference, as long as he was convinced that 
the motives of the adversary were honest and creditable. 

We are accused of not imitating Carl Schurz because we do 
not acknowledge the great debt we owe to the United States. 
In this respect also, times and conditions have changed. Carl 
Schurz and those who came with him were fugitives ; they had 
been persecuted for expressing their opinions and from putting 
them into action. They had no Fatherland, and they left Ger- 
many in a condition of discord and weakness, a house divided 
against itself, a Fatherland that had not treated them as even 
unruly children should be treated. The Germans who are here 
now have left, as I stated before, for economic reasons mostly, 

16 



and they brought only pleasant memories when they came to 
America. If they have prospered here they are not quite certain 
whether they would not have prospered as much at home, and 
whether they would have made the change if they had foreseen 
that the German Empire would develop so greatly on peaceful 
lines as it has done during the last three or four decades. They 
never felt the anger and contempt that the old 48ers could never 
fully overcome, and they know full well that what they have 
accomplished is the fruit of hard work, of knowledge and of 
honest effort, and that they have given full value for everything 
they have received. If they do owe a debt of gratitude to this 
country, there is such a debt due to them also for what they 
have done, although this is never acknowledged by the kind of 
Americans to which Mr. Villard belongs. 

The Truth About the Military Autocracy and Kaiserism. 

Mr. Villard shows his complete ignorance of German con- 
ditions when he talks of the rule of an iron military autocracy 
coupled with the aristocratic domination of great land owners, 
who are in turn the chief supporters of Kaiserism. You can 
hardly expect anything else from a man who still adheres tn the 
childish version of an important act in history, namely that 
Bismarck caused the Franco-Prussian war by forging a disnatch. 
A military autocracy indeed ! Do these gentlemen really not 
know-, and do they not want to learn, that the German army is 
an army of the whole people in the fullest sense of the word, 
and that all Germany knows not only that it owes to its army 
the forty-four years of peace which it has enjoyed, but to a large 
extent its success in every field of endeavor? Every little while 
we find in the American press the statement that the nobility 
rules the army, and that no sons of noble families are found in 
other professions. A glance at the army list would show these 
people who do not seem to want to learn the truth that at least 
three-fifths of the active officers of the German army are not 
of noble birth. In the reserve the percentage is much larger. 
The army list of 1914 shows that of the Major Generals about 
one-half were noble and one-half were not, and this relatively 
large proportion of nobles in the higher ranks is explained by 
the fact that many officers are ennobled when they rise to high 

17 



rank, and that these generals entered the army about forty years 
ago when the nobility was still to some extent preferred. An 
additional reason is that many of them came from old soldiers' 
families whose members have served in the army for six and 
seven and more generations. Thvts they were as children already 
under the influence of tradition, precept and example, which 
advantages naturally told in their career. The truth is that the 
German army is the most democratic military establishment in 
the world, and the difference between ofificers and men and 
between the different units is not as large as I have frequently 
observed it in the New York National Guard. 

The talk of the aristocratic domination of great land owners 
is nothing but an echo of the chatter of so-called German 
Liberals who were bitterly disappointed because the people did 
not permit them to rule the country. The so-called Liberal 
Party was indeed the most tyrannical, intolerant and domineer- 
ing party that has ever appeared in politics. They never ap- 
proved any measure that had not originated with them, and 
not many years before the last one of them disappeared it was 
a common saying that their platform was : "We do not know 
the reasons of the government for advocating this step, but we 
disapprove of them." The great land-owners dominate the 
government, arid the agrarians decide the fiscal policy of the 
German Empire ! Does Mr. Villard really not know that in 
Germany a much smaller percentage of the land is in the hands 
of rich families than in England or Russia? The agrarian party 
is by no means composed of aristocrats and large landed pro- 
prietors, but it derives its main strength from the peasants, and 
if this party has succeeded in protecting the fruits of the soil 
to a moderate degree against the competition from other con- 
tinents, it has done no more than American manufacturers who 
insist upon protection for their products. The burden thus im- 
posed upon the German people cannot have been very heavy, 
for we all know that the cost of living is much lower there than 
in this country, although the Empire is by no means as fertile 
as the United States. In Germany the former opponents of 
duties on foodstuffs, live cattle, etc., acknowledge today that 
this measure was one of the wisest that could be introduced. 
It has actually saved the life of the nation, for it brought about 
such an intensive cultivation of the soil that Germany today^ 

18 



cut off from its sources of supply, is able not only to feed her 
own population but to export this year certain products, to 
neighboring countries. If the Germans are satisfied with this 
system of taxation, we can see no reason why Americans should 
find fault with them, for Americans certainly have always 
fought for the principle that a people has the right to decide 
how it should be taxed, and this is exactly what the Germans 
have done. As long as a majority of them agreed to the present 
duties upon agricultural products they, in our opinion, have a 
right to such action even though a number of Americans are 
opposed to it. 

There arises the question whether the German people enjoy 
all the liberty to which they are entitled. The term lilierty 
means a great many things; in one country something entirely 
different from what it is understood to be in another country. 
Now, it seems only right to let every nation decide for itself 
what kind of liberty it wants, and under what form of govern- 
ment it feels happy. That the German people feel reasonably 
content with the government and the conditions under which 
they live seems, as I have said, proven by the fact that they 
stay at home and emigrate in such small numbers. Again, on 
this point, I cannot completely agree with the views held by 
Carl Schurz. He was of the opinion that every nation and every 
race of people was ripe for liberty, and that a certain measure 
of education or knowledge was not required to enjoy, and live 
happily under it. He held that liberty itself would elevate a 
people to a higher standard and could therefore be granted at 
any time and under any conditions. I and many others hold 
that there must be a certain preparation, and that it is dangerous 
to give more liberty to a people than they can understand and 
intelligently make use of. It has been left to Mr. Villard to 
announce an entirely new principle as far as my knowledge 
goes. He says : "There is something nobler and better than 
efficiency, something far more worth while than good gov- 
ernment, and that is self-government." I have always be- 
lieved, and I think now, that what we all strive and work 
for, for which we have brought many sacrifices and are 
fighting at every election, is good government. I, for my 
part, confess that the outward form of government has ap- 
peared to me always as a secondary consideration. I know 

19 



from my study of history that there have been republics which 
were much more tyrannical and despotic than monarchies. U\h- 
erty, security and happiness have been found under emperors 
and kings and have been lacking in states that claimed to have 
the freest institutions ever invented by mankind. Bad govern- 
ment is bad whether it is self-government or administered by 
others; good government is always good and worthy of being 
striven for. The claim that self-government is the highest form 
of government is certainly not open to debate, but we pay too 
little heed to the fact that a people can only govern itself, if 
every single citizen has learned to apply the rules of self-govern- 
ment to his own conduct. To be fit to take part in the self-govern- 
ment of a nation the individual must have shown that he has 
conquered his individual selfishness and can govern his own 
nature. I do not wish to go into this question any farther be- 
cause it is too large to be discussed here, but I am convinced 
that I will be with the large majority, and the majority should 
always rule, as Mr. Villard says, if I repeat that what we desire 
is, after all, good government. Any kind of government that does 
not give good government is really bad and should not be toler- 
ated, whether it be in the hands of the people, of elected officials, 
or monarchs. What we are after are results, and all high sound- 
ing phrases will not help or console us if we are suffering from 
institutions which cannot make the people happy and contented. 
There is another point to be mentioned. Have the Americans 
the right to assist the enemies of Germany to make war upon 
her and crush her simply because they do not like the form of 
government she has adopted? I think not. Whatever our 
opinion may be, the German people certainly have the right to 
choose their own form of government and resent all interfer- 
ence from outside. Mr. Villard's heart bleeds for four million 
social-democrats in Germany who are opposed to the monarchy 
and militarism, but I have not noticed that he ever had any 
tender feelings for the social-democrats .in this country, or in 
fact for anybody who differed with him on political questions. 
The German social-democrats can take care of themselves, they 
are now fighting and bleeding for their country. Of the many 
happy issues this war has produced, one of the greatest and 
most important is that the German people in general have at 
last recognized, and acknowledged now, that the social-demo- 

ao 



crats who had bitterly opposed many institutions of the country, 
are good Germans and as ready to defend Germany as all others. 

Ignorant of Conditions Prevailing in Germany. 

It is impossible to enumerate, and dwell upon, all the mis- 
takes contained in Mr. Villard's lecture. It must suffice to say 
that he is utterly ignorant of everything that has happened in 
Germany in the last forty years. When he pictures "thousands 
upon thousands of Germans coming to us bowed and oppressed, 
with hands outstretched and hearts aflame with hope," we do 
not know whether to pity him or to smile at his ignorance. He 
implores us to permit the followers of Bebel to tell their tale. 
They are telling it upon the battlefields in France and Russia 
and Belgium. "Let the disfranchised Prussians speak!" Where 
are they? Where has he found them? It is true that the sys- 
tem under which the Prussian diet is elected is antiquated and 
unjust, but remnants of former times remain and cannot be 
removed as quickly as we all wish, and it requires no great fore- 
sight to prophesy that this system will be changed as soun as 
this war is over. Where, we may add, has Mr. Villan-d seen the 
German-American "who upon bended knees give thanks that 
they are free to toil by day and by night so that their children 
may have the priceless opportunities to learn, to move about, to 
rise in the social scale, to vote, which were not their parents'?" 
Germans in Germany denied the right to learn, when the Ger- 
man Empire today has an insignificant percentage of inhab- 
itants who cannot read or write, less than any other civilized 
country, the United States of America not excepted ! Oppor- 
tunity to rise in the social scale ! Has Mr. Villard ever heard 
of Albert Ballin, Karl Helfferich, Emil Rathenau, August Thyssen, 
Ludwig Lowe, Heinrich Ehrhardt? These men rose not only 
from obscurity and humble beginnings to fortune and important 
stations in the lines of their endeavor, but they wielded a tre- 
mendous influence in the affairs of State and in the government 
of the Empire. It is almost pitiful to be compelled to listen to 
such gross ignorance, unjust prejudice, and to the evident 
pleasure of abusing a race to which this man owes gratitude 
and of which he should be proud. 

Mr. Villard devotes a large part of his speech to a book 

SI 



written by Prof. Julius Goebel. I hold no brief for Prof. Goebel, 
and I am quite positive that he is fully able to take care of him- 
self, though I must say that it seems not quite fair to hold the 
German-Americans as a body responsible for the utterances of 
one man. Mr. Villard finds fault with him for many reasons, 
and one of them is that Prof. Goebel demanded that the German 
language should be taught in all American schools. I think, 
and I am sure you will agree with me, that it would be .indeed 
a great boon for the American people and this country if in- 
struction in foreign languages in the puljlic schools could be 
extended. There can be only one opinion as to the value of 
such instruction. No man or woman can claim to be in pos- 
session of an education sufficient to give a right to judge others 
unless he or she is conversant with at least one language in 
addition to the mother tongue. The advantages are clear, and I 
have always believed that the reason why Americans have such 
a defective command of their own language is to be found in 
their ignorance of foreign languages. I do not believe that 
there is any other country in the world where it is so rare to 
find men or women who speak and write their language cor- 
rectly. The funny part, however, is that almost with the same 
breath in which Mr. Villard attacks the Germans for asking to 
have their mother tongue taught in the public schools, and the 
Norwegians, Bohemians, Poles and other nationalities for found- 
ing schools in free America for teaching their languages, he 
assails Germany for forbidding the Poles and Danes and French 
within the territory of the Empire to learn and use their own 
mother tongues. Similar statements are constantly made in 
American newspapers, and only the other day I found an edi- 
torial in which the Alsatians were commiserated with because 
the brutal Germans would not permit them to speak French. 
We also have heard a good deal of the joy of the peasants in 
Alsatia when the French occupied their villages and permitted 
them to study their beloved langauge again. The truth is that 
French is taug^ht in all German schools, and that in Alsace- 
Lorraine the inhabitants are permitted to speak French and have 
French newspapers. They as well as the Danes and Poles are 
indeed compelled to learn the German language, but that is as 
far as the government goes. It will, of course, not permit them 
to engage in political activities with the object of severing the 

S2 



districts in which they live, from the German Empire. This 
may look extremely tyrannical, but I doubt whether the United 
States of America would look on quietly if the Mexicans in Texas, 
New Mexico, Arizona, and California should start an agitation 
with the intention of uniting the counties in which they happen 
to dwell with Mexico. Not long ago a writer in an American 
magazine advocated a law compelling all immigrants to learn 
the English language immediately, and forbidding them to speak 
their own language ; those that did not master the English 
language within a certain time should be deported. The propo- 
sition was greeted with delight and approval by several New 
York newspapers. Perhaps they did not know that this law 
would go much farther than any law existing in Germany, where 
the children are compelled to go to school and learn German, 
but where nobody would dream of compelling a foreigner to 
discontinue the use of his mother tongue. It really seems as if 
the number of Americans who glory in their ignorance and look 
with contempt upon everybody who happens to speak more 
than one language is still much larger than we had supposed. 
To Mr. Villard's eye the danger looms large that these United 
.States will be divided into different territories where the im- 
migrants from various countries and their descendants con- 
gregate, retaining their own customs, their language and their 
views and making the part they inhabit completely like the 
country they come from. He asks: "Shall we begin first by 
crushing this new German propaganda which says in essence 
that the German-Americans are merely a transplanted bit of 
Germany, or what else shall we do?" 

The Silly Bugaboo of the German Propaganda. 

Let us assure him and those who are of his way of thinking 
that he need not fear the future, that the adopted citizens who 
have settled here and are going to stay here will work as loyally 
and as eagerly for this country as they have done in the past ; 
that the United States has nothing to fear from them, but can 
count upon them to join the ranks of the defenders if the Union 
should ever again be in danger. Let us impress upon Mr. 
Villard and those others who talk as he talks, that no German 
propaganda exist?, that it is present only in the imagination of 

23 



those who always look with ill-concealed contempt upon others 
whom they consider inferior to themselves; that it is a danger 
cunningly and skilfully devised by those who have for many 
years schemed to involve this country into misunderstandings 
with Germany in order to reap the benefit of their machinations. 
We may as well concede that here or there a German-American 
may have exceeded, and overstepped, the bounds, and said or 
done things that it would have been better to avoid, but the 
great mass of them has done no more than exercised their rights 
and fulfilled their duties. The cause of the whole disturbance, 
which we must deeply deplore, because dissensions of this kind 
cannot but be hurtful to the country at large, is the abuse 
showered upon Germany, the German people and the German- 
Americans, by almost the entire press and a large part of the 
American people, from the moment the war broke out. We 
cannot review the situation in detail now, but we know that 
Germany did not want this war, and was wantonly attacked 
when the three powers that had schemed for her destruction 
believed themselves strong enough to crush her. The efforts 
of those who devised the ruin of a whole people have been cnly 
too successful in this country. Every line coming from Great 
Britain and France has been believed. Proofs submitted from 
the other side, whose examination would have established the 
falsity of most of the accusations, have not even been considered. 
Numerous witnesses— American among them— have testified to 
the fact that the stories of atrocities committed by the Germans 
in Belgium were mere fabrications and inventions. The Ameri- 
can press will not accept any testimony to that effect. They 
hide behind the fact that Viscount Bryce has signed a report 
that established those atrocities beyond a doubt. We know that 
Viscount Brj'ce has not been in Belgium, and that the testimony 
under which he set his name was taken many miles away from 
the locations of the alleged crimes and given by persons who 
were suffering from black and unreasoning hatred and ready 
to go to any length to blacken the character of the Germans, their 
enemies. Let me mention only that Viscount Bryce states that 
Bishop Conraetz, in Louvain, was killed by the Germans. It 
has since been shown that Bishop Conraetz is alive and well. 
This is only one instance, while many could be given. The con- 
clusion is justified that Viscount Bryce signed the document 

2i 



without verifying the contents, in order to do his country a 
service. Greater and better men than Lord Bryce have, in 
critical times, done as much and more for their countries. It 
was of the greatest importance for England that these accusa- 
tions should be believed in the United States, for they have, no 
douljt, had an enormous influence upon public opinion. Let me 
give only one instance of the fairness of Mr. Villard's "Evening 
Post," which boasts that it is not partisan and does not favor 
either side. When it became known that the German g(i\ ern- 
ment had bought ammunition in this country, the "Evening 
Post" expressed deep regret that the German Military Attache 
had been engaged in business of this kind. The editor said that 
activities of such a nature were highly improper, and that he 
by no means singled out the German Military Attache, but would 
attack those of other powers as severely if they were found 
doing similar things. Me forgot entirely that his own paper 
had not once but at least half a dozen times, reported that the 
attaches of the other belligerent powers had bought arms and 
ammunitions in large quantities. Since then it has become 
public knowledge that these military attaches are acting as pur- 
chasing agents for their governments and are contracting for 
supplies of every kind to tlie value of many billions of dollars, 
but not a whisper of displeasure has come from the "Evening 
Post" or any other of the newspapers who were so quick to 
empty the vessels of their wrath upon the head of the German 
Attache for spending a few millions in this country. 

We ask nothing but justice. We a^k that the suppression of 
the truth, the perversion of the news t'lat is furnished fi'om 
Europe be stopped. \\'e ask that all nations be treated alike, 
Germany as well as France, Great I'.ritain or Russia. We ask 
that we be permitted to express our sympathies for Germany, 
our belief in the justice of her cause and our hope and con- 
fidence in her ultimate victory as freely as the French or the 
allies express themselves. i\Ir. Villard has quoted Carl Schurz 
so extensively that I may be permitted to say one more word 
on this subject. I, who knew him, and I lielieve every German- 
American, is convinced that if Carl Schurz were alive today he 
would stand at the head of this large part of the American people 
that cries for justice and truth and right, and that he would lead 
us, as he did so often, in our battles against [irejudice and 

25 



calumny. He was a German and knew Germany and the Ger- 
mans. In whatever way he may have differed with political 
developments in Germany, we are sure that he would not for 
one moment have believed the stories of cruelty and savagery 
attributed to German soldiers. He was ready to draw the 
sword when the cause which he considered sacred was in danger; 
he would have understood that Germany had to draw the sword 
and fight for her existence, and he would have known that a 
German is unable to commit the deeds with which the army has 
been charged. Those who were nearest and dearest to him 
ought to know where he would have stood, and they surely 
want to live in the knowledge that they are following in his 
footsteps and acting as he would want them to act. Where do 
they stand? They are with us and for us, as Carl Schurz would 
have been were he alive today. 

Where the German-Americans Stand. 

Let me recapitulate our views in a few words : From our 
knowledge of the history of Europe — and it is very unfortunate 
for us and for this country that so very few Americans know 
anything of European history — we know these facts as abso- 
lutely beyond dispute: Germany has not been the aggressor in 
this war; she wanted a continuance of the peace she had pre- 
served in the face of great and repeated provocation for forty- 
three years, under which she succeeded in securing for her 
people unprecedented progress, prosperity and contentment. Her 
army and navy was kept at a high degree of efficiency, because 
she was determined to protect herself against the recurrence of 
the time when Germany was the battle ground of all the nations 
of Europe. England began to scheme against the German Em- 
pire when her trade suffered from the competition of this new, 
strong and capable rival. England wanted to crush Germany, 
and found ready helpers in France and Russia. The assertion 
that France had no other motive than the justifiable desire of 
regaining the provinces which had been taken from her in 1871, 
is absurd. France robbed Germany of Alsace-Lorraine more 
than two centuries ago, and with the exception of a few districts, 
the population of these provinces remained German, and is 
Cerman now. The story of the "lost provinces" is a mere pre- 
ss 



text, for we know that France has attacked Germany at least a 
dozen times while she was in possession of Alsace-Lorraine. 
She wants all the territory west of the lower Rhine which has 
never been French, and never will be. In the last analysis the 
reason why France went to war is that she cannot look at a 
united, strong and prosperous Germany without being driven 
into impotent rage by her overpowering vanity and jealousy. 
Russia wanted to be the master of Europe, after she had been 
beaten in Asia, take possession of the Balkans and destroy 
Austria-Hungary. 

These three partners in the greatest crime committed 
against a peace-loving, splendidly educated and progressive 
people and in the last analysis against all mankind entered into 
their conspiracy years ago. They helped each other and pre- 
pared themselves, and struck when they thought they were 
strong enough to defeat Germany. The claim that Germany 
could have prevented the war l)y compelling Austria-Hungary 
to moderate her demands upon Servia is ridiculous. That was 
exactly what the Allies wanted. Austria-Hungary was the only 
ally left to the German Empire, for that Italy could not be relied 
upon was known to those in authority for several years. Austria- 
Hungary had been offered splendid inducements to join the 
Entente, and had refused. The German government had no 
right to interfere in the Servian matter. Had it dune so, and 
attempted to dictate to Austria-Hungary what course to take, 
the goverment at Vienna would have been compelled to conclude 
that its last and only friend had turned against it, and that it 
could only save itself by submitting to the demands of the 
Entente powers, and joining them. This would have meant 
the complete isolation and consequent defeat of the German 
Empire. This was the situation that England, l-'rance and 
Russia were trying to create, but the trick was too transparent 
not to be seen through by those most concerned, and today only 
a few American editors are repeating the long exploded argu- 
ments used by the .Allies, in the hope of deceiving the unthinking 
into the mistaken belief that Germany was the aggressor and 
not, as is really the case, most grievously sinned against. 

We have listened to the words of those who have pro- 
claimed what they hope to accomplish through this war. Eng- 
land wants to crush Germany, send the Gurkhas to Berlin, de- 
ar 



stroy the German navy and mercantile fleet, take possession 
of the German colonies and utterly annihilate German trade and 
commerce. France has declared that she will take western Ger- 
many at least as far as the Rhine, compel the German Empire 
to dissolve and reduce it to a condition where it has no voice 
in the policies of the world. Russia intended to take Eastern 
Prussia, Prussian Poland, Galizia and other parts of Hungary, 
as well as Constantinople. Belgium had long forfeited her 
neutrality by arrangements with France and Great Britain which 
made her the willing tool of the Entente and were directed 
against the safety of the German Empire. What price she was 
to receive is not known now but will probably come to the sur- 
face some day. Italy — but what is the use of talking of Italy, 
that will never live down the disgrace she has brought upon 
herself. On the other hand, Germany has from the beginning 
stated clearly, and repeats now, that she wants protection against 
attacks, the right to go her own way, the freedom of the seas, 
and nothing more. On which side are the motives that we can 
applaud as pure and righteous, that we should be in accord with, 
and that would earn our sympathies if the eyes of the most 
vociferous part of our people were not blinded by unreasoning 
admiration for and slavish deference to everything that is 
British and detrimental to free America? The answer is plain. 
And if you want to get a glimpse of the spirit that lives in the 
peoples now engaged in deadly combat, read the reports from 
the front of such Germans as Luilwig Gangliofer and Karl 
Rosner, and compare them with the writings of men like Rud- 
yard Kipling and Arnold Bennett. On the one side, not a harsh 
word against the enemies, full appreciation of the sufferings and 
the heroism of both armies, documents full of poesy and human 
feeling, and on the other sinister hatred, brutal and almost 
bestial lust of murder and vengeance, and coarse recriminations 
that tell of a pitiable reversion to primitive ages. 

It is enough. We German-Americans know our duty. We 
have chosen and will abide by our decision. We are not afraid 
of the continuance of the "hazing" mentioned by President 
Wilson, we do not fear the ostracism the newspapers threaten 
us with. We feel confident that if tlie time should come when 
a division is ordered and, as the President says, the men who are 
thinking first of other countries shall stand on one side, and all 

28. 



those that are for America first, last and all the time, on the 
other side, we will not be among those who are denied the place 
of honor. At the same occasion President Wilson said: "The 
American Revolution was the birth of a nation, it was the 
creation of a great free Republic based upon traditions of per- 
sonal liberty which heretofore had been confined to a single 
little island, but which it was purposed should spread to all 
mankind." Now, sorry as we are when we are forced to dis- 
agree with the Chief Executive of the Nation, we must tell him 
most emphatically that he is wrong. This country is not a 
New-England in a political sense, not a New-Great Britain. The 
men who fought and died in the war of independence and in 
the war of 1812 wanted this country to be free, not in name and 
for a time only, but free and independent of England and Eng- 
lish influence for all time. This spirit has descended upon us 
and we prize it as a noble and splendid inheritance. If it has 
been cast aside by others, we are resolved that it shall prevail 
as long as we have the strength to fight and die for it. We do 
not harbor the faintest trace of enmity against the United States 
of America, American institutions or the American people as a 
whole, though we feel bitter against those who have wantonly 
attacked and abused us. Although our love for the Fatherland 
can never die, we remain loyal citizens of this great Republic 
that has become our own country, ready to defend it against all 
enemies, eager to do our part in securing for it all the blessings 
the most enthusiastic mind can imagine, and we deplore deeply 
the dissensions caused by the unreasoning attitude of a con- 
siderable part of the population, so detrimental to that harmony 
which is essential to progress and contentment. But we serve 
fair notice upon all who may think that they can frighten or 
cajole us into submission, that our minds are made up, that no 
matter what happens to us, we shall continue this fight for 
truth, for justice, for right and for the independence of the 
United States of America until we have conquered or are no 
more. As German-Americans have been loyal to this Republic 
ever since it was created, so will we remain devoted to the 
country we have sworn allegiance to, to our ideals and to our 
just cause, even unto death. 



39 



,v 



"^ : 



^^ :^^ %/ /'"^■■^^ "^Z ^^^ %/ f^^ 
" ^^^^ /"% ^■^^^^•' /^o ^?%^:^ 0^"%. '&. 









^^•- ^'\ ■■^.- /\ =.»#!•• .^^'% '-ym-' / 






^.'^ 



V* 



-•A <r, -'.-t:- ,<y 










. v^. 



•' .^" .. 









A 



-Jv- 






.-A?. 



N^ 



^ •• IV 



,^- 



■0' 






s' 


\ '^ 


\' 


?vj)^. 




4. 




4 




<D 








■P 






. ' 


::^\ 




.■ir 






^0 


s^' 




^ .0'^ 


^^^ 






^v- 


^ 





■4.-' v'..-. -. 









-5^-, 



a\ 



'■'•:'!'v^'^ 



^^o^ 



C. . 






^^ •':>. 






,V' 






> - s " ' 






\^ ,* 



i-s^ 



0- i'""- o^ .4.-' 



W c 



• ^:55^-.^,.'^, 



> 



^y-e'^ 






-.v\/ 



C 



■'so- ^V 



\-- 









.0- ^2 






.-?•' 



^-^ 



^"'•^>, '.. 



°-i 



.0 









•^ .^^-^xIX', -^^ ,..^?> /..■ 






•-^ /hl' ■■ 






G 



«- 



■P 






I. 









A'-' . 









.,0' 






-^. 



,~' .0^ 



V^- 



^\:;^ (■" ^ 



,\'" 



A 



.:.'■ ,G^ 



■-^' 









, .^ './- , 



.0' 



.'^'V'!. 






V 






■5 -■', 



^ DOBBS BROS. fc 

\ r IIBRAHV BINDING 






O 
.0- ,■>'/* O. 



.'>•' .»■'".. ■•^•. 






!"ST, AUGUSTINE .-• ^ <s'^ °^ '"o'^'o''' -Si' '•''-^ 

, -< #&., '.i FLA. V 4=.%:% C\ o^ „'>•■>, V- 



>^> ' '- 






^^■ 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 



020 913 184 5 



